The European Union is now moving to create a mandatory electronic ID system for all EU citizens that would be implemented across Europe to standardize business both online and in person, authenticating users via a common ‘electronic signature.’

A single authenticating ID would guard access to the Internet, online data and most commerce.

It is nothing short of an attempt to phase in a Mark of the Beast system, and a prominent Bilderberg attendee is behind the scheme.

May 21, Tony Gosling, Bilderberg and the NAZI roots of Royalty
Vinny's NUTShell: Tony Gosling www.bilderberg.org gives a report on the upcoming Bilderberg protest in Chantilly Virginia and Occupy Bilderberg! The NAZI roots of the club and the history of Fascist support within the Royal families in Europe.

As in the course of 2011 and 2012 i wrote about, the transatlantic agenda is moving fast towards a secret ( semi secret) agenda of a fusionnal agenda between Europe and America on parliament and Senate ground.
Since 2015, as scheduled ( see article in Bilderberg 2011 about the secret agreement between US and EU) laws will be common as well as common economics decisions.
I spoke about last meeting in America with Obama, Barroso, Van Rompuy...and mr Karel De Gucht .(Washington's summit dated november 28,2011).
One question is now surging: how to make so a fusion with a demolished economic ground in Europe?
I believe personnaly that all this is maniganced in such a way that for the people of Europe and USA, there will be only one solution...the builded one!
Following the ' Official' list neither Barroso, Trichet,nor Van Rompuy was present, but Karel De gucht as i let it think was well there. One good point for me!
Karel De Gucht as a former Foreign minister of Belgium plundged the Congolese Belgian relations to a rather low level.He showed in the case a
lack of diplomacy. His actual efficacity on a European level combines different pack of interests. I will develop it later.
On a personal plan, Mr De Gucht is meeting tax difficulties in Belgium,
(he was suffocating about the insistence of the Belgian Fisc authorities to know the origin of certain goods belonging to him)
He is for instance hiring a little palace named ' La Maccinaia' in Toscane ( Italy)( see the site www.luxuryresorts.com). In low season the cost
of a week hiring is 4.660 euro.On high season the good could be hired at a
modest 7.990 euro per week.( information from the satirical belgian weekly ' le Père Ubu', 31.5.2012)

Belgian tax authorities have accused the European Union's trade commissioner Karel De Gucht of failing to declare a 1.2-million-euro ($1.5-million) profit on shares, a Dutch-language daily reported on Tuesday.

The business newspaper De Tijd said investigators had written to the former Belgian foreign minister and his wife regarding alleged "fraud" after discovering the transaction in 2005.

A lawyer for the De Guchts, Victor Dauginet, told the newspaper that the accusation was "scandalous."

Dauginet said the profit dated from 2001 when the British firm Hill & Smith entered into Belgian insurer Vista's capital. He said De Gucht was not liable for tax at that time.

The probe has focused on the purchase by the De Guchts of a second home in Tuscany.

Commission spokesman Olivier Bailly told a regular news briefing that it was a "private matter."

Bailly said that De Gucht had informed Commission head Jose Manuel Barroso of his position, and that the Commission was adopting a "presumption of innocence."

A document prepared by the Catholic lobby in France mentioned that the Syrian National Council is the military arm of the American intelligence.

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) - Controversial atmosphere took place after Basma Qadamani attended the largest Masonic conference in the world.

The report from which we are going to publish a document is attached to the conference of the global Bilderberg Group and prepared by a group of French activists who support the so-called Catholic lobby which is the most powerful in France. The report mentions that the position of France has deteriorated recently on the global level. The weakness of its presence in Bilderberg Club, the most important economic, political, security, and military club ever, is clear evidence. The conference classified the National Syrian Council as security and political council, and reported that there was a significant Turkish and Israeli representation as well as a sort of weird Syrian representation by the spokesperson of the Syrian Council "Basma Qadamani" and attributing her attendance to the presence of two high-level American security officials.

Some Arabic sites did not comment on Qadamani's attendance at Bilderberg Conference, yet some sides in the Syrian opposition criticized the event in electronic mails. Although we obtained some of those mails that were distributed among activists in this domain, however we will only publish certain paragraphs from the report of the French Catholic lobby since its publishers have a significant experience in Western relations, French security and politics, and inside the churchly lobby that is close to decision-making in France.

So weird was the attendance of a Syrian representative at the Masonic Bilderberg Club Conference, the club of world leaders and most powerful companies and personas in the world. Basma Qadamani is the spokesperson of the Syrian National Council or the so-called Council of Istanbul. Qadamani's unexplainable presence at the conference came along with the attendance of two Turkish representatives as well as a Russian, not to mention that it is the first time for those three countries to be represented at such conference.

A close side to the Catholic lobby in France prepared this report that mentioned the following: "The meeting of Bilderberg Group was held between May 31st and June 2nd in the Westfields Marriott Washington Dulles hotel, 40 kilometers from the White House, under intensive security and military measures. This place witnessed two previous meetings for the same group as sources stated. And Basma Qadadmani, the spokesperson of the Syrian National Council, attended it accompanied with the Israeli professor of Economics at New York University Itamar Rabinovich , in addition to Ariel Levitt, an instructor at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Among the attendees, there were the former Russian world champion of chess and the anti-president Vladimir Putin, Gary Kasparov, Obama's National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon, and Keith Alexander, the Director of America's major intelligence branch; the National Security Agency.
According to the same sources, the Turkish attendance was also notable. Turkish daily Harriet's editor-in-chief, Anis Barbar Oglu was present as well as Erdogan's Adviser for Economic and Financial Affairs, Ali Barbakan, and the Head of Turkey's Kook Group, Mustapha Kook. Professor of International Relations in the University of Sabanci, Fouad Kayman, and the General Manager of Vodafone Turkey, Serpil Timuray also attended on the Turkish level.

The report that described the Syrian National Council as the military arm of the CIA mentioned that:"Along with the attendance of Thomas Donilon and Keith Alexander, the symbolic presence of Qadamani, the representative of the number one group among the military opposition to Bashar Assad's regime, indicates that this council is the military arm of American intelligence agencies.

What is the Bilderberg Group?

Bilderberg Group represents an unofficial annual conference attended by 130 members, most of whom are the world's strongest politicians, businessmen, and bankers. Inside the conference, top secret talks about several global, financial, military, and political issues take place.

Any Arab or Islamic figure is allowed to attend the conference because all the talks are about them, especially how to control them and oblige them to surrender. The American activist Alex Jones recorded their meeting in 2009 and produced a documentary about this club asserting that Hillary Clinton attended it.

The international Wikipedia defines this group as: An unofficial annual conference attended by 150 invitees, most of whom are the strongest politicians, businessmen, and bankers worldwide. And global economic, military, and political issues are top-secretly discussed at the conference.
The Group was founded in 1954 after some rich and powerful men suggested its establishment. It was named after Bilderberg Hotel in the Dutch village Oosterbeek where the first conference was held in the same year. Europeans constitute two thirds of the members while the rest are Americans.

The meetings are annually held in Europe, and once every four years in the U.S. or Canada. The hotel in where the conference is held is totally reserved, extreme security measures take place, and media outlets are banned from having access. No statements are distributed after the meeting and members of the group have to say the oath of secrecy.

An internal management committee selects the new members according to a number of qualifications such as supporting Zionism and never opposing Semitism. Its members, in general, believe in Fabian's socialist theory which demands "democratic control on all the activities of the society." This theory considers that the "Global Government" is the best way to control humans. It is common between Fabian and Communism.

Among the invitees, there were representatives of the following companies: IBM, Xerox, Royal Dutch Shell, and others... The meeting of 2009, held in a Greek hotel, was attended by high-ranking figures such as Beatrix, the Queen of the Netherlands, Sofia, the Queen of Spain, the prime ministers of Greece and Finland, the U.S. Secretary of Treasury, the Head of the American Federal Reserve, the President of the World Bank, and the President of the European Commission. The broadcaster Alex Jones followed up several meetings of the group and took photos for the attendees. He also asserts in a documentary of his that Hillary Clinton was among the invitees of the 2009 conference.

With respect to the high-level personages affiliated with the group, and the unprecedented secrecy of its meetings, many theories about attempts to control world were referred to this club.

But the question that stands to reason is: For which excuse Basma Qadamani was invited to attend this high-level conference which gathers the world's most powerful personas on the levels of economics, martial, and security?
http://abna.ir/data.asp?lang=3&id=323230

We believe that Jesus Christ is coming again soon. Although world events are indicators that His return is drawing closer, Jesus told us that the end would not come until the Gospel of the Kingdom is preached unto all nations. "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." (Matthew 24:14)

That is why the most important mission of TRUNEWS is not to report bad news -- but to declare the Good News that Jesus saves and He promised to resurrect His children into eternal life in God's Kingdom. There just aren't any bigger news stories to report than the marvelous acts of the Holy Spirit around the world to save the lost, heal the sick, raise the dead, restore broken lives, and bless God's children; and the amazing world events and trends shouting that Jesus Christ is coming soon.

TRUNEWS was founded by Rick Wiles. Prior to launching this ministry, Rick's professional background was in media sales and marketing. In the mid-1980s, Rick was the national cable marketing manager for the CBN Cable Network (now the Family Channel) in Virginia Beach. In the 1990's, Rick was director of marketing for TBN in Irving, TX.

Rick resigned from TBN in 1998 when the Holy Spirit called him to full-time ministry after experiencing a life-changing vision about America's future. His first radio broadcast was on May 24, 1999. The original name of the radio program was America's Hope.

Rick and his wife Susan live in West Palm Beach, Florida. They have a daughter (Karissa), a son-in-law (Marshall) and a son (Jeremy), and two adopted grandchildren (Kiarra and Blake).

In a July 12 article for the Guardian’s “Comment is Free” section, Charlie Skelton poses the fundamental question the world’s media does not want asked.

“The Syrian opposition: who’s doing the talking?” is a devastating exposé of the intimate connections between the Syrian opposition and the US, British and French intelligence services, along with top US neo-cons. It traces the formation of the Syrian National Council and the appointment of its leading personnel to long-standing and well-funded plans for regime change in Syria and more generally in the Middle East. These plans date back to at least 2005, and have been funded by Washington in an effort to secure political control of the oil-rich region.

Skelton does not attempt to be comprehensive. He focuses on a few of the most prominent members of the SNC and identifies some of the most vociferous proponents of military intervention as being paid representatives of the Western powers.

Among those routinely cited as “official spokesmen” or “pro-democracy campaigner” is the Paris-based Syrian academic Bassma Kodmani, a member of the executive bureau and head of the SNC’s foreign affairs.

Kodmani is a repeated visitor to the Bilderberg group conference, an organisation of top political figures dedicated to strengthening the links between US and European imperialism and securing their collective global interests under the banner of promoting “Atlanticism.”

In 2005, she worked for the Ford Foundation in Cairo. That year saw a marked deterioration in US-Syria relations, with President George W. Bush contemplating military intervention against Damascus alongside Israel.

In September, Kodmani was made the executive director of the Arab Reform Initiative, funded by the US Council on Foreign Relations and its US/Middle East project—chaired by former national security adviser General Brent Scowcroft.

“Financial oversight” of the project was given to the Centre for European Reform (CER), a British think-tank headed by Lord Kerr, deputy chairman of Royal Dutch Shell.

Kodmani is also a member of the European Council on Foreign Relations, functioning as the executive director of its Arab Reform Initiative.

Radwan Ziadeh, the SNC’s director of foreign relations, is a senior fellow at the US Institute of Peace and a signatory to a letter calling for US military intervention alongside former head of the CIA James Woolsey, Karl Rove and other prominent neo-cons. He has acted as an intermediary between the White House and the Syrian opposition since 2005.

Najib Ghadbian, a University of Arkansas political scientist, is a member of the general secretariat of the SNC and is on the advisory board of a Washington-based Syrian Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, along with Ziadeh.

Ausama Monajed of the SNC is the founder of Barada Television, a pro-opposition satellite broadcaster and the former “director of public relations for the London-based Movement for Justice and Development” (MJD). Both are heavily funded by the US State Department, according to WikiLeaks.

Skelton cites some of the many hundreds of millions of dollars channelled into the Syrian opposition from the US and the Gulf States.

Among Monajed’s services to Washington was his publishing an official policy statement of the SNC, a document drafted by Michael Weiss of the Henry Jackson Society calling for intervention in Syria. The society is backed by top neo-cons such as William Kristol and Richard Perle.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, whose inflated figures on casualties are constantly cited by the media, turns out to be one man, Rami Abdul Rahman, based in Coventry and a clothes retailer.

Another Henry Jackson Society luminary is Hamza Fakher, described by Nick Cohen of the Observer as “one of the most reliable sources on the crimes the regime’s news blackout hides.”

The stories he has initiated have been routinely cited as eye-witness reports.

Fakher is the communication manager of Monajed’s London-based Strategic Research and Communications Centre and an employee of Barada TV.

Skelton deserves credit for writing so honestly on the network of connections between the Syrian opposition and the US/European military security apparatus. But the fact is that what he exposes will be well known to the research departments of the Guardian, the New York Times, BBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, et al.

None of them are being hoodwinked by anyone. They are willing conduits for imperialist war propaganda who ask no questions of the sources they cite because they do not want to undercut the drumbeat for war.

It is this that accounts for the scathing denunciation of Skelton in the next day’s edition of the Guardian by diplomatic editor Julian Borger

“US manipulation of news from Syria is a red herring,” the headline declares, “The big picture is clear.”

Accusing Skelton of “innuendo,” a heavy use of quotation marks to denote skepticism, “banal prose” and other literary crimes, Borger defends the various intelligence assets identified by Skelton as “people who have devoted a substantial share of their working life studying Syrian society and politics.”

This is a definition so value-free that could be applied to any number of imperialist strategists and spies.

The clear importance of Bassma Kodmani in the SNC hierarchy is simply dismissed, while Skelton is even derided for describing the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) as “a powerful US lobby group,” for being “needlessly sinister”. It is “America’s most prestigious foreign policy talking shop and research centre”, Borger insists.

Borger in fact argues against his own faux-naïf pose. No other foreign policy think tank is more influential than the CFR, and Kodmani is there as a trusted representative of US imperialist interests in the Middle East.

It must be added that Britain’s Socialist Workers Party and its global co-thinkers, the Pabloite United Secretariat, and other pseudo-left outfits demonstrate a similar politically motivated blindness to the true character of the Syrian opposition and its aims.

In June, Khalil Habash complained in the United Secretariat’s International Viewpoint, “The Syrian revolutionary process has since the beginning been met by circumspection by some on the left…accusing it of being a conspiracy of Western imperialist and reactionary regional countries such as Saudi Arabia. This trend has unfortunately continued….”

The SWP’s Simon Assaf was blunter still at the annual Marxism 2012 event. He said that he did not want to dwell on those alleging “conspiracy” due to the involvement of Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia or the US because “it would take me too long to calm down”.

It is not simply that these groups refuse to take a critical stance towards the opposition movement and the diverse social forces it represents—as would be necessary for anyone seeking to lay the basis for the development of an independent working class oppositional movement in Syria. Like the Guardian and other mainstream media, they very deliberately conceal the bourgeois, Sunni-sectarian and pro-imperialist character of the movement’s current leadership to conceal great-power imperialist intrigues, the end result of which will be more disastrous than even NATO’s war against Libya.

It's not easy being rich. Not when you're arguably the richest woman in the world, with a husband whose fortune is estimated at $53bn (£34bn); and certainly not when you decide to pursue a charitable endeavour that upsets religious institutions and offends the forces of conservatism.

Ms Gates spent her week doing just that, though, when she swept into London, with a suitcase full of trouser suits, and announced that her charitable foundation would be giving $560m (£375m) to a campaign to provide contraception to women across the developing world.

The gift, part of a $4.3bn effort led by the British Government, would "give a voice" to 120 million women who have little or no access to family planning, Ms Gates said, and reduce an estimated toll of 9,000 women and children who die each day because of unwanted pregnancies.

At the age of 47, she intends to devote the rest of her life to widening access to birth control. "This," she told an interviewer, "will be my life's work."

The move, unveiled in Westminster before an audience that included David Cameron, cements the status of Melinda Gates as the pre-eminent philanthropist of our time; perhaps of all time. Married to Bill, the founder of Microsoft, she represents what you might call the acceptable face of the one per cent: a socially responsible version of the old Hollywood anti-hero Montgomery Brewster.

It also leaves Ms Gates, who has pledged to give away at least 90 per cent of her net worth during her lifetime, in the firing line. A serious, shy woman, who uttered nary a word in public for the first 14 years of her marriage, her decision to make sexual health her signature issue has thrown her to the centre of America's rambunctious culture wars.

At issue is a matter of faith. Ms Gates was raised a Catholic. She has introduced her three children to the faith (although Bill is resistant), and remains a regular churchgoer. Yet her endorsement of contraception puts her directly at odds with both the Vatican and America's Catholic leaders, who are particularly vociferous on sexual morality, despite their own recent failings on that front.

In May, for example, her church waded into Tea Party politics to vigorously oppose an effort by the Obama administration to ensure that health insurers covered contraception. In 2002, it joined the religious right in persuading George W Bush to withdraw funding for the UN Population Fund.

Conspiracy theorists, of whom there is no shortage on the extremes of US politics, are now citing Ms Gates's previous attendance at Bilderberg conferences and friendship with Democratic tycoon Warren Buffet as evidence of sinister left-wingery. The anti-abortion website lifesitenews.com yesterday accused her of attempting "to give brown women Depo-provera".

If Ms Gates was thinking twice about poking this hornet's nest, she wasn't showing it this week, however, as she took to the airwaves to endorse her cause, sounding intelligent and well-briefed as she threw out statistics and geopolitical analysis alongside heart-rending anecdotes concerning women she's met on various tours of the Third World.

"Of course, I wrestled with this," she said. "As a Catholic, I believe in this religion. There are amazing things about this religion, amazing moral teachings that I do believe in, but I also have to think about how we keep women alive. I believe in not letting women die, I believe in not letting babies die, and, to me, that's more important than arguing about... contraception."

It was a virtuoso performance, marking a sort of transformation. Once the opaque life partner of America's wealthiest geek, Ms Gates has morphed into a dynamic public figure, on first-name terms with world leaders and rock-star humanitarians.

"Melinda really walks the walk," says a colleague. "In fact, she came to the summit straight from Niger and Senegal. She's in Africa three or four times a year, often in pretty sketchy places. So when you hear her speak about issues, you really feel her emotion and passion. She's a genuinely talented advocate."

Bono, a long-time friend, once summed up Ms Gates's charms by declaring her: "Fun to hang out with, and funny." The $125m pile on the shores of Lake Washington where she and Bill raise their children – Jennifer, 16, Rory, 13, and Phoebe, 10 – has a sense of "Zen" to it, he declared, admiringly. "Melinda has created that."

Life wasn't always so glamorous. Born in 1964, and raised in a middle-class suburb of Dallas, she became a hard-working young woman who took a BA in computer science and business at Duke University, followed by an MBA.

Her relationship with Bill was initially an office romance, which began shortly after she joined Microsoft, straight out of university, in 1987. They first met at a company dinner, in New York, and began dating after a chance meeting in a car park four months later. He was a newly minted billionaire in charge of America's hottest tech firm; she was a lowly new recruit to the marketing department.

It was hardly a whirlwind. In fact, things stayed off-and-on for years, as Bill devoted his energies to world domination. Their partnership was so discrete that when tech writer Stephen Manes published a biography of Gates, in 1993, she was referred to only in passing.

That changed soon afterwards, when Bill's mother Mary, a Seattle socialite, fell terminally ill. Rapidly approaching his 40th birthday, the Microsoft founder decided to settle down. They married on New Year's Day in 1994, six months before Mary's death.

Melinda promptly left Microsoft to start a family and began exploring her husband's long-neglected philanthropic interests.

"The place she occupied in his life was almost as a replacement for his mother," says Marc Aronson, author of a recent biography of Gates. "Mary had been very involved in philanthropy. Bill had been a somewhat rapacious builder of a company. As he came to the age when he wanted to settle down, he found a woman similar to her."

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation came into being soon afterwards, and has since distributed about $26bn in fields as diverse as Malaria prevention and education. It's run from a vast, boomerang-shaped HQ in central Seattle, where the couple share space-age offices connected by an interlocking door (Bill these days devotes only a fraction of his work life to Microsoft).

For the first 14 years of the Foundation's existence, Melinda took a behind-the-scenes role. "When the kids were very young, she felt it gave them more privacy," says a friend. But in 2008, once they had started school, she emerged from the woodwork, giving a series of interviews to launch her career as a public advocate.

It hasn't exactly been plain sailing ever since. Some have criticised the investment strategy of her Trust, which finances the Foundation, and has money in oil firms with contentious footprints in Africa, along with controversial "frankenfood" giant Monsanto. Others wonder if the sheer size of the Foundation, which employs almost 1,000 staff, makes it a sort of Microsoft of the non-profit world: a clunky institution with unhealthy dominance in its chosen fields.

Occasional commentators have meanwhile raised eyebrows at Ms Gates's occasional habit of talking about wealth as, in the words of one recent interviewer, "a cross she must bear".

Yet watch Melinda Gates in full flow, and it's hard to stay cynical for long. "At a time when many of the world's richest people seem to think lower classes are prey placed on Earth for their benefit, it's uplifting to see someone dedicate their life to the betterment of others," says Dick Brass, a former colleague. "In 100 years, the technology accomplishments and success of Microsoft are unlikely to be remembered. But the tens of millions of lives Bill and Melinda are saving will be remembered forever."

A Life In Brief

Born: Melinda French, 15 August 1964, Dallas, Texas.

Family: Married Bill Gates in 1994. They have three children: Jennifer, Rory and Phoebe.

Education: Ursuline Academy, Dallas; Duke University (BA in Computer Science and an MBA).

Career: Went to work for Microsoft in 1987, developing multimedia products. After marrying Bill Gates in 1994, she left the company and became the co-founder and co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

She says: "The premise of this foundation is that one life on this planet is no more valuable than the next."

In a recent article, ‘The Global 1%: Exposing the Transnational Ruling Class’, the authors identify the global power elite (that is, the mainly white men setting the agenda at the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group and other elite organizations) and explain the ways in which this elite acts to maximise their own private gains at the expense of the 99%. Moreover, they demonstrate how the US/NATO military-industrial-media empire operates in service of this transnational corporate elite.

Another report, ‘The Price of Offshore Revisited’ explains how the global elite has $32 trillion (one-sixth of the world’s wealth) hidden in offshore tax havens while one billion humans live on the edge of starvation and, even in many industrialised countries, basic social services like provision of clean water, healthcare and education are chronically underfunded.

Some reports highlight the strong push to wage war on Syria and Iran, with its catastrophic consequences – see, for example, ‘Syria and Iran Dominoes Lead to World War’.

After all, the production of weapons is highly profitable (especially if they are exploded), the capture of oil resources is highly profitable (if ownership is passed to transnational corporations) and even rebuilding programs (particularly of high-tech infrastructure) in countries devastated by war is profitable.

A recent article on the ongoing climate catastrophe, ‘Arctic Sea-Ice Melt Record Just Not Being Broken, It’s Being Smashed’, provides further evidence of the disintegrating Arctic ice cap which, unless halted, will have catastrophic consequences for human civilisation given that a destroyed ice cap will accelerate the melting of the Greenland ice sheet and the collapse of the Gulf Stream.

And two other articles describing developments in the United States, ‘Three myths about the detention bill’, and ‘Homeland Security Prepares for Civil War’, provide illustrative descriptions of how the global elite is responding to our collective efforts to stem their violence, both direct and structural: by inflicting greater violence on us through such mechanisms as indefinite detention without trial or killing us outright with ‘hollow point’ (body exploding) bullets.

We are under enormous threat and the time to deal with it effectively is shortening rapidly.

So, my central questions are these: Why do individuals within the global elite create and control structures of violence, and then defend them with military and police violence, so that they can systematically kill or exploit vast numbers of their fellow human beings? In short, why don’t they care? And what can we do about it?

A Psychological Profile of the Global Elite and their Agents

Most individuals within the global elite have the psychological profile of archetype perpetrators of violence: I have explained this at length in ‘Why Violence?’. In essence, these individuals have suffered an extraordinary level of terror and violence during childhood leaving them particularly badly emotionally damaged. Specifically, for example, two central psychological characteristics of these individuals are that they are terrified and self-hating but, because they unconsciously suppress their awareness of this terror and self-hatred (because it is too painful to feel), they project it as fear of and hatred for ‘legitimised’ victim groups such as members of other races and/or religious faiths; working people; indigenous peoples; women; people
labelled as ‘terrorists’; ‘poor’ people in Africa, Asia and Central/South America; and children. These global elite individuals never developed a conscience; they also lack the capacity to love and to feel compassion, empathy and sympathy. This is why they do not care.

Many individuals who act as agents, wittingly or unwittingly, for the global elite are often seeking a legitimised way to inflict their own violence. This is easy to do, for example, by working within other structures of power controlled by the global elite. This includes national political systems, the military and the police, legal and prison systems. For example, political leaders owe their allegiance not to voters, but to those corporate elites who fund their election campaigns. And judges enforce laws – conceived by elites and put into effect by their political lackeys – to strengthen elite control, to stifle and punish dissent, as well as to control (by imprisoning if necessary) those excluded from economic opportunity. Progressive thinkers, such as Karl Marx, Leo Tolstoy and Mohandas K. Gandhi, have exposed elite violence perpetrated through the legal system. And anyone who has ever asked why there are no laws against poverty and homelessness intuitively understands this. The rule of law is the rule of elite violence.

Resisting Elite Violence Strategically

So how do we strategically resist the efforts of those individuals who perpetrate violence against us whether directly or structurally? How do we replace elite-controlled structures with ones that meet the needs of all human beings as well as the planet and other species? And how do we do all of this within a timeframe in which the Earth’s ecological limits are not fundamentally breached?

To do all of these things, we need an integrated strategy that tackles the fundamental cause of violence while tackling all of its symptoms simultaneously. This strategy has four primary elements. First, and most importantly, we must review our child-raising practices to exclude all types of violence (including those I have labelled ‘invisible’ and ‘utterly invisible’) so that we no longer create perpetrators of violence in the first place (see ‘Why Violence?’).

Let us create people of conscience, people of courage, people who care.

Second, we must noncooperate, in a strategic manner, with elite-controlled structures and processes while simultaneously creating alternative, local structures that allow us to self-reliantly meet our own needs in an ecologically sustainable manner. Anita McKone and I have mapped out a fifteen-year strategy for doing this in ‘The Flame Tree Project to Save
Life on Earth’.

Third, we must keep planning and implementing sophisticated campaigns of nonviolent resistance to prevent wars, end economic exploitation and save threatened ecosystems, as well as strategies of nonviolent defense to liberate Palestinians, Tibetans and other oppressed populations in those circumstances in which elite violence must be directly confronted (see Robert J. Burrowes ‘The Strategy of Nonviolent Defense: A Gandhian Approach’, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996 and Gene Sharp
‘The Politics of Nonviolent Action’, Boston: Porter Sargent, 1973).

And fourth, we must courageously pay the price of violent elite repression when we resist nonviolently, knowing that many of us are going to be imprisoned (sometimes as ‘psychiatric’ patients), some of us will be tortured and a great many of us will be killed.

In summary, if we are to effectively resist elite control and violence in our lives and take concrete steps to create our nonviolent world, then we must recognise the enormity of the psychological damage that individuals within the global power elite have suffered and accept that they cannot take responsibility for ending their violence. Instead, we must take responsibility for ending their violence while creating a world in which damaged individuals are unlikely to be created and, if they are created, they cannot wreak havoc on the rest of us. If you would like to consider publicly committing yourself to helping to make this nonviolent vision a reality, you can read (and, if you wish, sign) ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World’.

Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of ‘The Strategy of Nonviolent Defense: A Gandhian Approach’. His email address is flametree@riseup.net and his website is at http://robertjburrowes.wordpress.com

If European commissioners attend the Bilderberg 'shadow world government' events at the taxpayers' expense, doesn't the public have a right to know what goes on behind the closed doors? PublicServiceEurope.com dissects the commissioners' latest expenses claims, including first-class flights

European Commissioners who attended the latest meeting of the secretive Bilderberg group have been accused of double standards for refusing to reveal any details of what was said during the seminars while charging the taxpayer more than €4,000 each to cover their expenses. Spanish Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia put in an expenses bill of €4,322 following the four-day meeting in the American state of Virginia - which brought together political leaders, the private sector and royalty in what has been dubbed a 'shadow world government'.

Meanwhile, the expenses of Dutch European Digital Agenda Commissioner Neelie Kroes totalled €4,167, while the expenses of Belgian Trade Commissioner Karel de Gucht came to a mere €980 as he combined attendance at the May event with a separate trip to Washington. The figures were revealed by the commission itself in response to a parliamentary question by Philip Claeys, a Belgian MEP who wanted to know if the bureaucrats were attending as private individuals or as representatives of the European Union. According to the event's official website "participants attend Bilderberg in a private and not an official capacity", although according to commission president Jose Manuel Barroso the three were indeed representing the Brussels executive. Responding to Claey's question, Barroso said that "the travel expenses incurred were paid by the commission, as for any mission".

Claeys tells PublicServiceEurope.com that Barroso's reply was "very strange". He continues: "I think that is a lot of money. The commissioners say they were attending in their own capacity and were invited personally, but when it comes to paying their expenses - suddenly they are members of the European commission. It is not correct. When there are questions about what is going on, about who said what, they cannot say. They should at least pay their own expenses."

The Bilderberg meetings, which are by invitation only, take place behind closed doors "to allow participants to speak their minds openly and freely". The forum, which dates back to 1954, was established due to concerns that "western Europe and North America were not working together as closely as they should on common problems of critical importance". Among this year's attendees were: Keith Alexander, commander of the United States cyber command and director of the National Security Agency; Marcus Agius, chairman of Barclays; British politician Kenneth Clarke; Robert Dudley, group chief executive of oil and gas giant BP; Austria's Federal Chancellor Werner Faymann; Pascal Lamy, director-general of the World Trade Organisation; and His Royal Highness Prince Philippe of Belgium.

Given that Bilderberg's "hospitality costs" are "the responsibility" of the members of the group's steering committee from the host country, the commissioners' expenses are likely to refer in part to the cost of transatlantic flights. Asked if commissioners have the right to fly first class, spokeswoman Pia Ahrenkilde Hansen says "there are many situations applying". Hansen's colleague, Antonio Gravili, did not respond to a request for more detail. But commissioner De Gucht is more forthcoming. "Yes, we do have the right to fly first class," he tells PublicServiceEurope.com, in a walking interview on the street outside the commission's headquarters in Brussels. The class of travel depended on issues such as the length of the trip and whether or not it involved an overnight stay, De Gucht says.

Pierre Vimont, executive secretary-general of the European External Action Service - the EU's diplomatic arm - also attended this year's Bilderberg event, although there is no mention in Barroso's reply of his expenses claim. "The meeting was not attended by any official of the European Commission", Barroso stated. Commissioners might, however, have been accompanied by members of their cabinet - some of whom are not classed as officials according the nomenclature. When asked who else from Brussels went with him, De Gucht says he could not remember anyone other than his two fellow commissioners. He dismisses conspiracy theories surrounding the event, which he has attended more than once. "It's no world government," he insists.

It is quite possible that the Brussels contingent at this year's Bilderberg summit was larger than the official figures suggest and the expenses claim higher. Given that we will never know what went on, it is perhaps justifiable to ask whether the taxpayer got real value for money. The more critical commentators would suggest not.